DomainKits

Active Domain Search

active

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search active gTLD domains from a database of ~240 million registered domains, filtered by keyword, TLD, length, and character set. A market-analysis instrument for keyword distribution and saturation; results are registered domains, not available for registration.

Related: expired, whois, dns.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`tld`	No	Filter by TLD (e.g., 'com', 'net', 'org'); when keyword is omitted, this is the browse target
`page`	No	Page number for pagination
`sort`	No	Sort order
`type`	No	Character set filter
`length`	No	Domain name length filter
`status`	No	Filter by status: 'forsale' for domains listed for sale
`keyword`	No	Brand or industry term (min 2 chars). Omit to use TLD browse mode.
`position`	No	Keyword placement in domain name. Default is 'all' (substring match). Unlike the other search tools, this one has no minimum-length restriction on substring matching.
`no_hyphen`	No	Exclude hyphenated domains (true/false)
`no_number`	No	Exclude domains containing numbers (true/false)
`tld_count_max`	No	Maximum cross-TLD registration count for the name. Integer 0-10000. See tld_count_min.
`tld_count_min`	No	Minimum cross-TLD registration count for the name. Integer 0-10000. Combine with tld_count_max for a range; set both equal for an exact count.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`data`	No
`page`	No
`error`	No	Error message when success is false
`total`	No	Number of results on this page
`success`	Yes
`max_page`	No
`total_found`	No	Total matching results across all pages — primary metric for comparative analysis

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the bar for extra disclosure is lower. The description adds valuable context about the database size, the active/registered domain status, and the intended analytical use, which helps the agent reason about results without contradicting the annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is compact and front-loaded, with the core action in the first sentence. The only minor inefficiency is repeating that domains are registered in both the first and second sentence, but overall it earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given 12 parameters, an output schema, and strong annotations, the description provides enough contextual grounding: it identifies the domain universe (active gTLD), the analytical use case, the registered status, and related tools. Nothing essential for selecting and invoking the tool is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents all 12 parameters. The description adds only a high-level summary of filter categories (keyword, TLD, length, character set) and does not provide deeper meaning beyond what the schema already offers.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Search active gTLD domains from a database of ~240 million registered domains.' It clearly defines the tool's scope and differentiates it from siblings such as expired and available by stating results are registered domains, not available for registration.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives clear context: this is a market-analysis instrument for keyword distribution and saturation, and it excludes domains available for registration. It also lists related tools (expired, whois, dns), though it does not explicitly state when to choose each sibling over the others.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All DomainKits tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Disambiguation3/5

Many domain-search tools (active, aged, expired, deleted, market, nrds, nrds_live) have overlapping boundaries that depend on subtle lifecycle or listing distinctions, and pairs like bulk_tld/tld_check and nrds/nrds_live are easy to confuse. The detailed descriptions and related-tool hints help, but an agent still faces several nearly interchangeable choices.

Naming Consistency4/5

All tool names follow a consistent lowercase_snake_case convention, with no mixing of camelCase or inconsistent verb styles. However, the names use a noun/adjective pattern rather than a clear verb_noun action pattern, and acronyms like nrds, epp_status, and tld_rank make some names less predictable.

Tool Count2/5

32 tools is heavy for a domain toolkit, and several tools are close variants of the same search or check operation, such as active/aged/expired/deleted/market and nrds/nrds_live. The broad domain scope justifies some breadth, but the set would be much more focused with consolidation.

Completeness4/5

The toolset covers the core domain lifecycle well: availability, registration states, WHOIS, DNS, pricing, TLD statistics, safety, backlinks, typosquatting, and monitoring. The main gaps are that strategy can store data but has no retrieval or deletion action, and market pricing is limited to Sedo only.

Active Domain Search

Input Schema

Output Schema

TDQS

Glama MCP Gateway

TDQS

Resources